Universal's New Park/Site B Blue Sky Thread

[Casper Gutman]

I’m a bit baffled as to why folks are considering LOTR and ST less likely to appear in the new parks. Have we received fairly definitive info that they’re out?

A new park wants some “bang” to get folks in the gates. Nintendo is a big bang, but you’re gonna want more than one IP, especially one that will leave non-gamers cold. ST and LOTR seem to offer the most bang that hasn’t appeared in a major park yet. They also lend themselves very well to themed areas.

Fantastic Beasts is great, but it won’t be unique - they’ve got two wonderful HP lands already. To some extent, the DC heroes risk suffering from the same issue. I am very aware of the differences between DC and Marvel heroes, but to many, they’re all superheroes.

I’m also a bit skeptical of the WB deal. WB, along with Disney and Uni, is one of the three more or less healthy studios. What’s more, we are seeing studios get more and more into theme park development and ownership. Surely WB is aware of the headaches the Marvel contract has caused Disney - are they really eager to foreclose future opportunities, however theoretical, with an iron clad Uni deal? If this were Par or Col it might make more sense.

Besides, Uni already has a surfeit of animated properties. Do they really need the Looney Toons, which I love, but which are also less current then any of Unis own properties? As for Unis animated properties, do they really want to pour them all into one park? They still need Kidzone and Toon Lagoon replacements - isn’t it better to keep the brands of the various toon groups and the various parks more clearly demarcated?

And Rankin/Bass? Does anyone care about Rankin/Bass? I find the specials dated (very 60s) and creepy. For a holiday event, perhaps.

My completely uninformed guess?
Sci-Fi Land, anchored by ST
Fantasy Land, anchored by LOTR
Horror Land, anchored by Uni Monsters
Nintendo Land
DreamWorks Land

I’m sure I’m working off outdated info, but that lineup makes so much more sense to me.

 

[Mike S]

They might not put Nintendo at IOA or USF anymore.

And lose out any potential multi park ticket sales from the hardcore video game fan base? No dice.

 

[Imperius]

Pretty sure people with info here are now saying no LOTR. Star Trek was always really just a fantasy. SNW plus Pokémon is more than enough to anchor the park with the other talked about ideas. Pokémon > Star Trek in current popularity.

 

[Mike S]

Pretty sure people with info here are now saying no LOTR. Star Trek was always really just a fantasy. SNW plus Pokémon is more than enough to anchor the park with the other talked about ideas. Pokémon > Star Trek in current popularity.

Mario + Zelda in the new park makes more sense than Mario + Pokémon even though I still think all three should be in a different park. Those two are huge so it makes more sense to split them between the north and south resorts.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Pretty sure people with info here are now saying no LOTR. Star Trek was always really just a fantasy. SNW plus Pokémon is more than enough to anchor the park with the other talked about ideas. Pokémon > Star Trek in current popularity.

SNW plus Pokemon hits a big audience, but it’s a similar audience for both.

Star Trek has a smaller fan base then Pokemon, but it does have a very dedicated fan base. It also has wide awareness - a lot of people know about ST. Most importantly, a great big Enterprise provides a hugely enticing visual marker that can be used in publicity and is enticing even to people who aren’t big ST fans. What visual elements does Pokemon bring to a theme park? anyway, Uni isn’t choosing between ST and Poke.

A short time ago the rumors of LOTR were very strong. Where is the anti-LOTR info coming from?

 

[Magic-Man]

And lose out any potential multi park ticket sales from the hardcore video game fan base? No dice.

Well, it seems like there’s a chance all Nintendo properties got moved. It would explain that Nintendo-only park rumor.

 

[Magic-Man]

SNW plus Pokemon hits a big audience, but it’s a similar audience for both.

Star Trek has a smaller fan base then Pokemon, but it does have a very dedicated fan base. It also has wide awareness - a lot of people know about ST. Most importantly, a great big Enterprise provides a hugely enticing visual marker that can be used in publicity and is enticing even to people who aren’t big ST fans. What visual elements does Pokemon bring to a theme park? anyway, Uni isn’t choosing between ST and Poke.

A short time ago the rumors of LOTR were very strong. Where is the anti-LOTR info coming from?

Insiders.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Insiders.

I apologize, I really haven’t been following for the last few months and this is a massive thread. Which section of this thread saw that info emerge? I’m not trying to be obtuse, any pointers would be welcome.

 

[quinnmac000]

I apologize, I really haven’t been following for the last few months and this is a massive thread. Which section of this thread saw that info emerge? I’m not trying to be obtuse, any pointers would be welcome.

about 30 pages ago.....

From the properties I've been told may show up - LOTR is not on that list.

I'm glad someone else was the first to "announce" the unlikelihood of LotR. I had heard it a while ago, but didn't want to address it.

Actually, TPU (who said no LOTR or Star Trek) said no generic lands or Hello Kitty.

 

[Legacy]

I've been hearing no LotR for about six-seven months. I don't discuss much outside of HHN though. I think it's just starting to get recognized as a real likelihood.

 

[Magic-Man]

I apologize, I really haven’t been following for the last few months and this is a massive thread. Which section of this thread saw that info emerge? I’m not trying to be obtuse, any pointers would be welcome.

No problem, sorry if I was a little rude. Check the recent messages and the latest Universal-related article on Theme Park University.

 

[Casper Gutman]

No problem, sorry if I was a little rude.
Check the recent messages and the latest Universal-related article on Theme Park University.

Thanks to everyone who helped.

I agree with you, Lin, that that leaves the park rather bereft of adult IPs. Nintendo is also a bit tricky because it was already announced - I’d think they’d want a big bombshell announcement when they officially announce the park.

The lineups being posited just seem... odd. But we’ll see!

 

[Imperius]

Thanks to everyone who helped.

I agree with you, Lin, that that leaves the park rather bereft of adult IPs. Nintendo is also a bit tricky because it was already announced - I’d think they’d want a big bombshell announcement when they officially announce the park.

The lineups being posited just seem... odd. But we’ll see!

Think it makes sense when others have said they are gearing this more towards younger crowds. Think more Magic Kingdom and less IOA.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I gotta say, the insiders here are convincing, but that Themepark Univeristy article is not. It’s just conjecture based on rights ownership. The section on LOTR seems to be entirely based on info from before Christopher Tolkien’s passing, which we know has changed the situation.

 

[Magic-Man]

Think it makes sense when others have said they are gearing this more towards younger crowds. Think more Magic Kingdom and less IOA.

There will still be adult IP’s (Fantastic Beasts, Classic Monsters, DC Comics, Ready Player One all fit this bill) but they will not be the main focus.

 

[Imperius]

There will still be adult IP’s (Fantastic Beasts, Classic Monsters, DC Comics, Ready Player One all fit this bill) but they will not be the main focus.

Ehh outside of Monsters the others are teen oriented. RPO could lean a little older, but the ride would be toned down from evil corporation wanting to murder you.

 

[Magic-Man]

Ehh outside of Monsters the others are teen oriented. RPO could lean a little older, but the ride would be toned down from evil corporation wanting to murder you.

True. But I sometimes refer to teen IP’s as adult IP’s. I do the same with Marvel, Jurassic Park, and Transformers.

 

[Awakening]

Do we really think it'll just be Fantastic Beasts and none of the classic Potter? Just seems like an odd choice when there are plenty of people who saw the Harry Potter movies, but have never made the jump to the newer franchise.

 

[Magic-Man]

Do we really think it'll just be Fantastic Beasts and none of the classic Potter? Just seems like an odd choice when there are plenty of people who saw the Harry Potter movies, but have never made the jump to the newer franchise.

There isn’t much more you can do with the Harry Potter franchise as it currently stands. They’ve already built Diagon and Hogsmeade, with more expansions on the way.

Meanwhile, the Fantastic Beasts franchise is new and unused.

 

[Awakening]

There isn’t much more you can do with the Harry Potter franchise as it currently stands. They’ve already built Diagon and Hogsmeade, with more expansions on the way.

Meanwhile, the Fantastic Beasts franchise is new and unused.

Agreed, but when you think of icons: Mario, Harry Potter, Shrek, those are names/brands that can anchor a new land; I just have a hard time imagining Newt Scamander has the same draw to the general public.